← All Phrases

“profit element”

DisallowancesSection 69CSection 69C5,654 judgments

The decision most relied on for profit element is CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451), cited in 1,465 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on profit element

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth
356 ITR 451 · 2013 · High Court
1,465
citing judgments

Additions for alleged bogus purchases should be restricted to the profit element, not the entire turnover. The profit element is often estimated at 12.5% of the purported bogus purchases.

CIT v. President Industries
258 ITR 654 · 2002 · High Court
471
citing judgments

When books of account are rejected and unaccounted sales or receipts are discovered, the income addition is restricted to the net profit element embedded in these undisclosed transactions, not the entire sale proceeds or receipts, especially if corresponding purchases are not proven to be outside the books.

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT
316 ITR 274 · 2009 · High Court
460
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or unverifiable purchases, rather than disallowing the entire purchase value, a reasonable profit element or a proportionate percentage of the purchases should be added back to the assessee's income.

CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft
310 ITR 320 · 2009 · High Court
259
citing judgments

Reimbursements of actual expenses without any profit element are not taxable income. Additionally, mere amendments to the Income-tax Act do not override the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs).

CIT v. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Ltd.
355 ITR 498 · 2013 · High Court
252
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or hawala purchases where the existence of transactions is not entirely denied, only the profit element embedded in such purchases, and not the entire purchase price, can be added to the assessee's income. The focus is on determining a reasonable profit percentage for such additions.

CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar
263 ITR 610 · 2003 · High Court
212
citing judgments

When making an addition for unaccounted receipts, on-money, or non-genuine purchases/sales, the addition should be restricted to the estimated profit element embedded in such transactions, rather than the entire gross amount, particularly when evidence of corresponding expenditure is incomplete. This estimation often involves applying a net profit rate.

CIT v. Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja
302 ITR 63 · 2008 · High Court
147
citing judgments

When unaccounted receipts or suppressed sales are detected and books of account are rejected under Section 145(3), additions to income must be restricted to the profit element embedded in such transactions, not the entire transaction value. This profit element is to be estimated by considering the assessee's regular profit ratio as per books of account.

PCIT v. Mohommad Haji Adam & Co.
103 Taxmann.com 459 · 2019 · High Court
146
citing judgments

Where purchases are found to be bogus, the profit element embedded in such purchases is to be brought to tax, not the entire purchase value. An addition for non-genuine purchases may be justified.

Judgments citing profit element

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji vs. M/S Mohit Ispat Ltd., Kundaim

Appeal of the Revenue is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 9/PAN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S M/S Mohit Ispat Limited 339/340, Kundaim Industrial Estate, Goa-403115 Pan: Aaccm8154E . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Shriniwas Naik & Narchiva Lotlikar [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr Naveen Kumar [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 04/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Appeal Of The Revenue Instituted U/S 253(2) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges Order Dt. 04/10/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-2, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Sprung From Order Of Assessment Dt. 30/12/2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Acit, Central Circle, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2016-17.[‘Ay’]

For Appellant: Mr Shriniwas Naik & Narchiva Lotlikar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Naveen Kumar [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 253(2)

independent findings but on twofold premise/basis that; (i) the Ld. Coordinate bench’s decision in assessee’s own case where addition was restricted to profit element only and (ii) Ld. AO did not adhere to basic rule that for every sale there must of corresponding purchases. ITAT-Panaji Page

Co-Operation Metals, Pune vs. ITO Ward 6(3), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2321/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

instant case the Assessing Officer has accepted the sales made by the assessee. Relying on the following decisions he submitted that only the profit element embedded in such unaccounted purchases can be added to the total income and not the entire purchases: 1) Amcon Construction ... never earned such income. 10. A perusal of the decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee shows that only the profit element embedded in such bogus purchases can be added and not the entire purchases to the total income of the assessee. It has been held that

Co-Operation Metals, Pune vs. ITO Ward 6(3), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2320/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

instant case the Assessing Officer has accepted the sales made by the assessee. Relying on the following decisions he submitted that only the profit element embedded in such unaccounted purchases can be added to the total income and not the entire purchases: 1) Amcon Construction ... never earned such income. 10. A perusal of the decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee shows that only the profit element embedded in such bogus purchases can be added and not the entire purchases to the total income of the assessee. It has been held that

Co-Operation Metals, Pune vs. ITO Ward 6(3), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2319/PUN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

instant case the Assessing Officer has accepted the sales made by the assessee. Relying on the following decisions he submitted that only the profit element embedded in such unaccounted purchases can be added to the total income and not the entire purchases: 1) Amcon Construction ... never earned such income. 10. A perusal of the decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee shows that only the profit element embedded in such bogus purchases can be added and not the entire purchases to the total income of the assessee. It has been held that

Income Tax Officer, Pune vs. Cooperation Metals, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2263/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

instant case the Assessing Officer has accepted the sales made by the assessee. Relying on the following decisions he submitted that only the profit element embedded in such unaccounted purchases can be added to the total income and not the entire purchases: 1) Amcon Construction ... never earned such income. 10. A perusal of the decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee shows that only the profit element embedded in such bogus purchases can be added and not the entire purchases to the total income of the assessee. It has been held that

Income Tax Officer, Pune vs. Cooperation Metals, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2262/PUN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

instant case the Assessing Officer has accepted the sales made by the assessee. Relying on the following decisions he submitted that only the profit element embedded in such unaccounted purchases can be added to the total income and not the entire purchases: 1) Amcon Construction ... never earned such income. 10. A perusal of the decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee shows that only the profit element embedded in such bogus purchases can be added and not the entire purchases to the total income of the assessee. It has been held that

DCIT-13.3.2, Mumbai vs. Remi Sales and Engineering Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 9259/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2011-12
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

cases where sales are accepted and purchases are doubted, the entire purchases cannot be 3 Remi Sales and Engineering Limited disallowed and only the profit element embedded therein can be brought to tax. Accordingly, he restricted the addition to 15% of the alleged purchases. 5. We have given our thoughtful ... treated as wholly bogus, for the simple reason that without purchases, there cannot be any sales. At best, such cases may warrant estimation of profit element embedded in such purchases, 4 Remi Sales and Engineering Limited particularly where the possibility of inflation of purchase price or procurement from grey market

Income Tax Officer, Pune vs. Cooperation Metals, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2271/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

instant case the Assessing Officer has accepted the sales made by the assessee. Relying on the following decisions he submitted that only the profit element embedded in such unaccounted purchases can be added to the total income and not the entire purchases: 1) Amcon Construction ... never earned such income. 10. A perusal of the decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee shows that only the profit element embedded in such bogus purchases can be added and not the entire purchases to the total income of the assessee. It has been held that

M/S. Perq Advertisings Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 76/MUM/2026[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2026AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sameer G. DalalFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

made in the hands of the Assessee in respect of alleged bogus purchases since the Assessee had failed to furnish corroborative documents. The profit element embedded alleged bogus purchases was computed at 14.60% of the alleged bogus purchases of INR.2,94,53,819/-. In the quantum appeal, the Learned

M/S. Perq Advertising Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 75/MUM/2026[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2026AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sameer G. DalalFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

made in the hands of the Assessee in respect of alleged bogus purchases since the Assessee had failed to furnish corroborative documents. The profit element embedded alleged bogus purchases was computed at 14.60% of the alleged bogus purchases of INR.2,94,53,819/-. In the quantum appeal, the Learned

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur vs. Apoorva Sarovar, Kurnool

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 181/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.181/Viz./2025 Assessment Year 2018-2019 The Dcit, Apoorva Sarovar, Central Circle-2, Vs. Kurnool – 518 004. Guntur – 522 004. State Of Andhra Pradesh. State Of Andhra Pradesh. Pan Abefa4123B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri C Subrahmanyam, Ca For Revenue : Sri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, V.P. :

For Appellant: Sri C Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 133A

Assessing Officer for the year under 5 ITA.No.181/VIZ./2025 consideration. The learned CIT(A) has restricted the said addition by taking the profit element @ 12% of the unaccounted/undeclared turnover. The learned DR has submitted that the learned CIT(A) failed to consider the fact that, had the Department ... restricted firstly in respect of the differential amount which is only 18 ITA.No.181/VIZ./2025 Rs.2,20,64,493/- and then only to the profit element by estimating the profit at 12% on the alleged unaccounted turnover in Para nos.6.4 to 6.4.5 as under: “6.4. Unadmitted turnover as per assessee

Harshad Kanjibhai Panchani, Surat vs. ACIT, Ward 3(2)(3), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 732/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 68

these facts, taxing the entire gross receipts would result in unrealistic assessment of income. What can reasonably be brought to tax is the profit element embedded in such receipts. In the present case, authorities below have brought entire gross deposits to tax without considering withdrawals or business expenditure. Considering

Shree Bharti Developers, Surat vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Surat

In the result, ITA No. 84/Srt/2022 for assessment year

ITA 89/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar, Hon’Ble & Ms. Suchitra Kamblea.Y. 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-D.R
Section 143(1)

erred in restricting the addition made by the AO of Rs.3,88,09,174/- on account of on-money receipts by observing that only profit element of the gross on money receipts can be considered for taxation, without considering the facts that the assessee could not produce any documentary evidences

Shree Bharti Developers, Surat vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Surat

In the result, ITA No. 84/Srt/2022 for assessment year

ITA 88/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar, Hon’Ble & Ms. Suchitra Kamblea.Y. 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-D.R
Section 143(1)

erred in restricting the addition made by the AO of Rs.3,88,09,174/- on account of on-money receipts by observing that only profit element of the gross on money receipts can be considered for taxation, without considering the facts that the assessee could not produce any documentary evidences

ACIT, Central Circle-4, Surat vs. Shree Bharti Developers, Surat

In the result, ITA No. 84/Srt/2022 for assessment year

ITA 84/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar, Hon’Ble & Ms. Suchitra Kamblea.Y. 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-D.R
Section 143(1)

erred in restricting the addition made by the AO of Rs.3,88,09,174/- on account of on-money receipts by observing that only profit element of the gross on money receipts can be considered for taxation, without considering the facts that the assessee could not produce any documentary evidences

Rahul Thakur Lh of Rajesh Thakur, Solan vs. Deputy Commisioner of Income Tac Central Circe Shimla, Shimla

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 1435/CHANDI/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1052/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1053/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1054/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1055/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) M/S Rajesh Kumar & Co. Dcit/Acit (Central) बनाम/ Vs. Gopal Building, Kather By Pass Shimla Solan (Hp) - 173213 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ablfm-2356-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1433/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1434/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1435/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Jain (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 69ASection 69C

Shri Rahul Thakur (Legal heir of Shri Rajesh Thakur). Upon further appeal, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed substantive additions and rejected plea of addition of profit element. The protective addition for Late Shri Rajesh Thakur was deleted subject to the rider that if a stand was taken by the assessee ... reasonable profit estimation on unaccounted sales as quantified by Ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings. It has further been stated that once profit element has been estimated on the sales, the separate addition of unaccounted purchases could not be sustained. 4. We find that similar arguments have been

Rahul Thakur Lh of Rajesh Thakur, Solan vs. Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax Central Cicrle Shimla, Shimla

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 1434/CHANDI/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1052/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1053/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1054/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1055/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) M/S Rajesh Kumar & Co. Dcit/Acit (Central) बनाम/ Vs. Gopal Building, Kather By Pass Shimla Solan (Hp) - 173213 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ablfm-2356-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1433/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1434/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1435/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Jain (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 69ASection 69C

Shri Rahul Thakur (Legal heir of Shri Rajesh Thakur). Upon further appeal, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed substantive additions and rejected plea of addition of profit element. The protective addition for Late Shri Rajesh Thakur was deleted subject to the rider that if a stand was taken by the assessee ... reasonable profit estimation on unaccounted sales as quantified by Ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings. It has further been stated that once profit element has been estimated on the sales, the separate addition of unaccounted purchases could not be sustained. 4. We find that similar arguments have been

Rahul Thakur Lh of Rajesh Thakur, Solan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle Shimla, Shimla

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 1433/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1052/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1053/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1054/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1055/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) M/S Rajesh Kumar & Co. Dcit/Acit (Central) बनाम/ Vs. Gopal Building, Kather By Pass Shimla Solan (Hp) - 173213 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ablfm-2356-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1433/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1434/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1435/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Jain (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 69ASection 69C

Shri Rahul Thakur (Legal heir of Shri Rajesh Thakur). Upon further appeal, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed substantive additions and rejected plea of addition of profit element. The protective addition for Late Shri Rajesh Thakur was deleted subject to the rider that if a stand was taken by the assessee ... reasonable profit estimation on unaccounted sales as quantified by Ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings. It has further been stated that once profit element has been estimated on the sales, the separate addition of unaccounted purchases could not be sustained. 4. We find that similar arguments have been

Ranjana Kalta, Shimla vs. ACIT(Central), Shimla

Appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 1060/CHANDI/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1056/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1057/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1060/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1058/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Smt. Ranjana Kumari / Kalta Dcit/Acit (Central) Kalta Niwas (Near Sharma Niwas) Shimla बनाम/ Vs. North Oak,Sanjauli, Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171006 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bbndp-5738-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1046/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1047/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1048/Chandi/2025

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Jain (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 271ASection 69A

plausible explanation has been furnished on the seized evidences. Therefore, the addition is justified. The next prayer of Ld. AR is reasonable estimation of profit element. In the case of Shri Kapil Gupta of M/s Himgiri Beverages (ITA Nos. 1010/Chandi/2025 & ors.), the bench has estimated profit element ... total collections. However, the assessee being a retail vendor would enjoy higher margins. Considering the same, we estimate the profit element of 3% on total cash collections of Rs.1,33,48,595/- which comes to Rs.4,00,458/-. The impugned addition stand restricted to that extent only

Ranjana Kumari, Shimla vs. DCIT/ACIT(Central), Shimla

Appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 1058/CHANDI/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1056/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1057/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1060/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1058/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Smt. Ranjana Kumari / Kalta Dcit/Acit (Central) Kalta Niwas (Near Sharma Niwas) Shimla बनाम/ Vs. North Oak,Sanjauli, Shimla Himachal Pradesh - 171006 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bbndp-5738-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1046/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1047/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 7. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1048/Chandi/2025

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Jain (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 271ASection 69A

plausible explanation has been furnished on the seized evidences. Therefore, the addition is justified. The next prayer of Ld. AR is reasonable estimation of profit element. In the case of Shri Kapil Gupta of M/s Himgiri Beverages (ITA Nos. 1010/Chandi/2025 & ors.), the bench has estimated profit element ... total collections. However, the assessee being a retail vendor would enjoy higher margins. Considering the same, we estimate the profit element of 3% on total cash collections of Rs.1,33,48,595/- which comes to Rs.4,00,458/-. The impugned addition stand restricted to that extent only